Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 30394 (CHH)

MANOJ KUMAR BHATT v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/4928/2025 · 2025-08-19

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:42193 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4928 of 2025 • Manoj Kumar Bhatt S/o Ishwar Prasad Bhatt Aged About 36 Years R/o Gerwani, Police Station - Punjipathra, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Punjipathra, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Aashish Gupta, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 20/08/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.143/2025 registered at Police Station - Khairagarh, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Punjipathra 34(2) and 59(A) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. As per the prosecution case that on 08.06.2025 during the patrolling the police official have received information from the informant that the applicant kept the liquor in his house, on the basis of above information, the police has enquired about the liquor from the VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.08.22 11:08:43 +0530 2 applicant and found 25 bulk liter of country made liquor from the courtyard of the house of applicant, thereafter seized the aforesaid liquor from the illegal possession of the applicant and crime has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The mandatory provisions with regard to search and seizure have not been followed by the Police in this case. He also submits that the under Section 34(2) of the Chattisgarh Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years. He further submits that applicant has two criminal antecedents, bearing crime No. 258 of 2024 for offence under section 36(c) of Excise Act and Istagasa No. 151 of 2024 under sections 126(A), 135(3) of BNS Act, which have been disposed of to paid fine amount and he is in jail since 08.06.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. Learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and 25 bulk liter of country made liquor has been seized from the present applicant and the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits applicant has two criminal antecedents, bearing crime No. 258 of 2024 for offence under section 36(c) of Excise Act and Istagasa No. 151 of 2024 under sections 126(A), 135(3) of BNS Act, which have been disposed of to paid fine amount, applicant is a habitual offender. As such, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the fact that the applicant has two criminal antecedents, 3 out of which one case is under the Excise Act, charge-sheet has been filed and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Manoj Kumar Bhatt, involved in Crime No.Crime No.143/2025 registered at Police Station - Khairagarh, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Punjipathra 34(2) and 59(A) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali